Is Internationalization Beneficial to Innovation? Evidence from a Meta-analysis

Abstract

This paper conducts a meta-analytical review to examine the impact of internationalization on innovation, with particular attention to the role of research design factors that may confound causal inferences. The existing literature is examined (1) to determine the average effect of internationalization on innovation and (2) to assess how variations in key aspects of research design has affected results. Analysis of 99 studies reveals that the effects of internationalization on innovation are diverse but are generally positive, albeit the effect sizes are mostly small to moderate. The inferred magnitude of such effects is influenced by research design factors and that country-context matters. The results suggest that internationalization measurements, data characteristics and statistical artifacts affect the variations in effect sizes. We conclude with a discussion of opportunities and challenges in future research on the internationalization-innovation nexus.

Internationalisation, knowledge intensity, adaptive culture and absorptive capacity: a strategic entrepreneurship enabling logic for export firms

“…While DOI enables firms to achieve economies of scale, scope enables risk diversification and thus improves financial and market performance (Kotabe et al ., 2002; Lu and Beamish, 2004; Maksimov and Luo, 2021; Saridakis et al ., 2019). This study reveals that DOI can, directly and indirectly, develop SE through a venture's knowledge intensity and the moderating effects of firm dynamic capabilities, concentrating on absorptive capacity and adaptive culture (Anderson et al ., 2019; Ding et al ., 2021; Freixanet et al ., 2020; García-García et al ., 2017; Marano et al ., 2016). Knowledge plays a crucial role in sustaining a competitive edge and developing new revenue streams (Aggarwal and Kapoor, 2018; Autio et al ., 2000; De Clercq et al ., 2012; Ferreira et al ., 2017; Kotabe et al ., 2002; Teece, 2018; Tavassoli et al ., 2017; Oviatt and McDougall, 1995; Pradana et al ., 2020; Zahra and George, 2002; Zhang et al ., 2021).…”

“…Although the KBV and DCs take slightly different approaches in examining the relationship between resources and competitive advantages, they are fundamentally concerned with acquiring, developing and effectively utilising resources to secure competitive advantages. The primary distinction between these two approaches is the mechanism by which innovation results in competitive advantages (Ding et al ., 2021). The KBV is concerned with how firms generate knowledge from their resources, and the DC is concerned with cultivating routines and practices to enhance competencies via internationalisation through a firm's learning mechanism (Gkypali et al ., 2018; Jiang et al ., 2016).…”

“…These contradictory findings may result from the lack of attention accorded to the firm performance effects of internationalisation, and critical mediators and moderating factors are considered important contextual components (Cao et al ., 2016). It would be beneficial to investigate the efficacy of the DOI estimates for SE using various theoretical approaches (Ding et al ., 2021).…”

The importance of institutional and financial resources for export performance associated with technological innovation

“…Innovation is measured using patents. The extant literature has extensively debated the measures of innovation, with a range of measures being proposed, including input-based and output-based (for reviews, see Ding et al, 2021;Dziallas and Blind, 2019). There are advantages of using patent, an output indicator, over input indicators such as R&D expenditure measures or dummy variables capturing whether firms conduct certain types of innovation or not.…”

CEO Narcissism and Global Performance Variance in Multinational Enterprises: The Roles of Foreign Direct Investment Risk‐Taking and Business Group Affiliation

“…How an MNE's overall FDI activities (often termed 'multinationality') impact performance has received extensive attention (for reviews and meta-analysis, see Kirca et al, 2011Kirca et al, , 2012Marano et al, 2016;Nguyen and Kim, 2020;Yang and Driffield, 2012). FDI helps MNEs create new revenue streams through resource acquisition, cost reduction, efficiency improvement and network opportunities (Ding, McDonald and Wei, 2021). FDI can also improve performance by acting as a real options facilitator that provides growth options, switching options or put-type contraction or abandonment options within the MNE networks of subsidiaries, so that the MNE can take advantage of upside opportunities or reduce downside risk (Aabo, Pantzalis and Park, 2016).…”